Boyd v. City of San Rafael

4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SHALEETA BOYD, et al., Case No. 23-cv-04085-EMC (EMC) 8 Plaintiffs, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS' 9 v. MOTION FOR EXPEDITED TRANSCRIPTS AT THE 10 GOVERNMENT'S EXPENSE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, et al., Defendants. Docket No. 92 13 Plaintiffs that are proceeding in forma pauperis filed a motion for expedited transcripts at the government’s expense. Docket No. 92. Plaintiffs ask not only to have copies emailed to them, but also that 14 hard copies of each transcript be mailed to the Plaintiffs. Id. Plaintiffs cite to 28 U.S.C. § 753(f) for the proposition that the transcripts should be provided to them at the government’s expense. Id. However, this statute is not applicable. This statute provides that “Fees for transcripts furnished in other proceedings to persons permitted to appeal in forma pauperis shall also be paid by the United States if the trial judge or a circuit judge certifies that the appeal is not frivolous (but presents a substantial question).” 28 U.S.C. § 753(f). Plaintiffs have not stated any intention to file an appeal and accordingly, the statute is not applicable here. The case law cited by Plaintiffs is likewise inapposite because in those cases, transcripts were provided at the government’s expense where plaintiffs sought a non-frivolous appeal. See, e.g., McKinney v. Anderson, 924 F.2d 1500, 1511-12 (9th Cir. 1991) (production of transcript at government expense for in forma pauperis appellant in civil case proper if trial judge certifies “that the appeal is not frivolous and presents a substantial question”).

27 // 1 Accordingly, the Court hereby DENIES Plaintiffs’ motion. The Court will send courtesy || copies of the transcripts that were already ordered by the Defendants to the Plaintiffs via email.

4 IT IS SO ORDERED.

6 Dated: November 20, 2023 7 LL 8 eM EDWARD M. CHEN 9 United States District Judge

© = 17 Z 18